PDA

View Full Version : Domain Actions



Seb Berendse
02-25-1997, 09:26 PM
> Does anyone think that BR needs a supplement further detailing the
> domain turns?
I think it certainly could come in handy, but only after a while.
Then they can put all the domain actions published over the various
stuff in one book, explained in great detail (ar leave it up to the
DM/Players to make the exact examples).

> Eg. Does a person need a guild at either end of a trade route? Does a
> trade route cost more over a greater distance?
Aye on both ends, if it goes through different territory then 'your
own (where your base is) you might also need a diplomacy action. You
might make a diplomacy action with another guild, so you sort of
share the trade route, in that case you need only have one holding.
And cost does increase over length.

>How long does an investiture ceremony last?
Roleplay and make of it what you like! Be inventive, I bet you're old
and wise enough to make something up, it's much more fun if you play
it that way.!

Base

************************************************** ***************
Sebastiaan G.P. Berendse
148530@student.fbk.eur.nl

There is a world just around the corner of your mind
where reality is an intruder and dreams come true.
You may escape into it at will, you need no secret password,
magic wand or Alladins Lamp, all you need is your own imagination...
************************************************** *******************

Cec Stacey
02-26-1997, 10:54 AM
Does anyone think that BR needs a supplement further detailing the
domain turns? They seem pretty sketchy in the boxed set rulebook, and
we've already come across a whole bunch of holes, inconsitencies and
unanswered questions.

Eg. Does a person need a guild at either end of a trade route? Does a
trade route cost more over a greater distance? How long does an
investiture ceremony last? If a domain ruler is killed without an heir,
can anyone come in with an investiture and scoop up the uncontrolled
holdings? Can they pick and choose which holdings they want?

Jonathan Picklesimer
02-26-1997, 07:01 PM
On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, Cec Stacey wrote:

> Does anyone think that BR needs a supplement further detailing the
> domain turns? They seem pretty sketchy in the boxed set rulebook, and
> we've already come across a whole bunch of holes, inconsitencies and

IMHO, I think that the domain turn descriptions are fine the way that
they are. The more detail that TSR provides, the less the game becomes
your very own.

> Eg. Does a person need a guild at either end of a trade route?

No. Consider the sea trade route. With that all you have to have is a
guild holding in the province of origin. It would be nice to have a
guild at teh other end of an overland trade route. IF you don't you wind
up paying some other guild to help you sell your product.

> Does a
> trade route cost more over a greater distance?

Not appreciably. Check out the new domain action from THe Havens of the
Great Bat on extending trade routes. The price outlined in the Rulebook
is for a fixed distance route. Any extensions to taht standard route are
going to cost more, but just a plane old trade route will cost the same
if it goes 1 province or 6 provinces.

> How long does an investiture ceremony last?

That sort of depends. I am sure that an investiture done on a
battlefield would take less tahn half an hour. On hte other hand, a
large state afair may last several hours for all of the speeches, pomp,
and circumstance.

> If a domain ruler is killed without an heir,
> can anyone come in with an investiture and scoop up the uncontrolled
> holdings?

Sure can. That is why you make sure that you invest your bloodline
BEFORE you die, or as Prince Fhailerience (spelling?) did, divest before
you get into trouble!

> Can they pick and choose which holdings they want?

Yes. Why not?

Always remember that this is your game. Figure out how you want it to
work and then play it that way!

Jonathan

Verrrucht@aol.co
02-27-1997, 09:51 PM
In a message dated 97-02-26 07:00:32 EST, you write:

>

Since a trade route is used for "trading" doesn't it make sense that you
would hold one guild and another regent would hold the other?

>

See Build (roads)



3 weeks. It is an action. Imagine all the administrative workings involved in
the transfer of power. Just think about the time it takes in the
campaigning, electing and inaugurating politicians of the modern world. Just
to use the U.S. president as an example, even though he may have won the
election in November, he isn't inaugurated until January. And then he is
sworn in or "invested" with duties.



Yes but they had better have some serious backup.



Unless someone else gets to them first.

Vestrii@aol.co
02-28-1997, 05:55 AM
In a message dated 97-02-27 20:29:31 EST, you write:

> Since a trade route is used for "trading" doesn't it make sense that you
> would hold one guild and another regent would hold the other?

I would allow a trade route between provinces where the regent does
not controll a Guild at each end but he'd have to split the profits and
regency with the other guild since you're using him as your
representative in that market. If you had a guild in both then you would
be able to represent your own interests and cut out the middle man.

Just how I see it...

Dave

Berendse, S.G.P.
02-28-1997, 01:37 PM
> > Since a trade route is used for "trading" doesn't it make sense
that you
> > would hold one guild and another regent would hold the other?
> I would allow a trade route between provinces where the regent does
> not controll a Guild at each end but he'd have to split the profits and
> regency with the other guild since you're using him as your
> representative in that market. If you had a guild in both then you would
> be able to represent your own interests and cut out the middle man.

This is a perfectly sane thing to do, cause when the caravan arrives
at one end, he'll take up new stuff to take to the other. Person A
gets money from B for his goods and vice versa. Good idea!

Base
S.G.P. Berendse
E-Mail: 148530@STUDENT.FBK.EUR.NL

There is a world just around the corner of your mind
where reality is an intruder and dreams come true.
You may escape into it at will, you need no secret password,
magic wand or Alladins Lamp, all you need is your own imagination...

LLathrop84@aol.co
03-02-1997, 05:56 AM
In response to your question of further clerification on Birthright's rules,
I whole-heartedly agree. I've been ruinning a Birthright Campaign for a
year, and I can't count the ambiquities our group has found in the Domain
rules. The only solution we have found is to make permanent interpretations,
IE: (House Rules) for each new question that is brought up. The players have
also started to develop new Domain Actions to add to the existing list. If
anyone has new Domain Actions already developed I'd be interested in seeing
them. One other suggestion for clerification is to cross reference the
inconsistacies with other source books (Expansions) that has helped our group
muddle through some of the dilemas.

mefheitz
03-02-1997, 01:36 PM
Do you have hese "house rules" on your computer. I would be interested in
seeing what you have done and trying to use them within my own campaign.

John Heitz
mefheitz@sgi.net

- ----------
> From: LLathrop84@aol.com
> To: birthright@MPGN.COM
> Subject: Re: [BIRTHRIGHT] - Domain Actions
> Date: Sunday, March 02, 1997 12:56 AM
>
> In response to your question of further clerification on Birthright's
rules,
> I whole-heartedly agree. I've been ruinning a Birthright Campaign for a
> year, and I can't count the ambiquities our group has found in the Domain
> rules. The only solution we have found is to make permanent
interpretations,
> IE: (House Rules) for each new question that is brought up. The players
have
> also started to develop new Domain Actions to add to the existing list.
If
> anyone has new Domain Actions already developed I'd be interested in
seeing
> them. One other suggestion for clerification is to cross reference the
> inconsistacies with other source books (Expansions) that has helped our
group
> muddle through some of the dilemas.
>> To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the
line
> 'unsubscribe birthright' as the body of the message.

Sean Brown
03-03-1997, 07:23 PM
Howdy all..I am new to this list so I will probably be a little slow
in catching up to all the topics...bear with me. I would like to say
that if anyone has copies of their house rules on computer, I would
love to have a copy. I am suer I would be able to integrate many of
them into my existing campaign (possibly answering many of the
recurring questions we have in our campaign). Thanks :)

Sean

LLathrop84@aol.co
03-16-1997, 06:17 PM
I have never typed all of the modifications out on the computer because it
would take a while, and because the list grows every couple of Domain turns.
But if there were some specific questions, that several people have, I'd be
glad to post any house rules we use for those ambiguities, a question or two
at a time. Also if any one else out there has any written modifications to
Domain Actions, or even new actions please post them.

trustno1@atcon.co
06-19-1997, 06:13 PM
>> Can you give an example ?
>
>Example: When the NPC contests one of the PC's holdings. Would the PC
>automatically know who which NPC is doing it, or not? I think it
>depends on the exact form the action takes.

I'm inclined to say that the PC would know who.
If it where temple holdings, then someone would be denouncing the PC's
religion profusely, or promoting their own above all the other. If it were
guilds, then maybe an advertising/promotion (?) campaign, so some other
business activities....

Brian Stoner
06-19-1997, 07:12 PM
L. Willett wrote:

> >One of my players (who has co-DMed) brought up a question recently.
> When an
> >NPC carries out a domain action that involves one of the player
> characters,
> >does the player character know who their opponent is? We both think
> that
> >the PC would not necessarily know, but he wanted me to check with the
> rest
> >of you. If this has been discussed in the past, were there any
> >rulings/decisions?
> >
> >-Brian
>
> Can you give an example ?
> *********************************
> *****************************************

Example: When the NPC contests one of the PC's holdings. Would the PC
automatically know who which NPC is doing it, or not? I think it
depends on the exact form the action takes.

- -Brian

Kariu@aol.co
06-20-1997, 01:09 AM
In congress or in many political, bussiness situations you do know who has
been against you. It makes sense that also in BR you would know who
contests, rules a holding, or creates a holding in your domian.

Cec Stacey
06-20-1997, 09:50 AM
trustno1@atcon.com wrote:

> >> Can you give an example ?
> >
> >Example: When the NPC contests one of the PC's holdings. Would the
> PC
> >automatically know who which NPC is doing it, or not? I think it
> >depends on the exact form the action takes.
>
> I'm inclined to say that the PC would know who.
> If it where temple holdings, then someone would be denouncing
> the PC's
> religion profusely, or promoting their own above all the other. If it
> were
> guilds, then maybe an advertising/promotion (?) campaign, so some
> other
> business activities....
>

I have an idea. A regent should be able to hide is involvement in a
hostile realm action if he wants to - some kind of subterfuge or
espionage. For example, say that the guild wants to contest the above
temple in retaliation for a bungled trade deal. Maybe the guild doesn't
want the church to know who's involved? Maybe they want to shift the
blame? How about doubling the cost for the domain action, or having the
guild do an espionage action first to hide the source of a domain
action? That way you wouldn't know who was bidding RPs against you.

trustno1@atcon.co
06-20-1997, 11:30 AM
>What about letting the player explain how exactly he wants this
>contest action to take place. Then the DM can decide if the action is
>noticed by others (or by some specific others or perhaps not at all).
>The only thing a PC would know is that he is contested and quite
>probably (something of) how it was done. It would increase the
>uncertainty in your campaign, but it would be great for roleplaying.
>Just take the example of the Spiderfell. If you do it right it'll
>probably be a lot more fun.
>
Maybe an Intrigue or Espionage action would be a good way of handling this ?

Bresser, R.T.
06-20-1997, 12:59 PM
> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 06:50:00 -0300
> From: Cec Stacey
> To: birthright@MPGN.COM
> Subject: Re: [BIRTHRIGHT] - Domain Actions
> Reply-to: birthright@MPGN.COM

> trustno1@atcon.com wrote:
>
> > >> Can you give an example ?
> > >
> > >Example: When the NPC contests one of the PC's holdings. Would the
> > PC
> > >automatically know who which NPC is doing it, or not? I think it
> > >depends on the exact form the action takes.
> >
> > I'm inclined to say that the PC would know who.
> > If it where temple holdings, then someone would be denouncing
> > the PC's
> > religion profusely, or promoting their own above all the other. If it
> > were
> > guilds, then maybe an advertising/promotion (?) campaign, so some
> > other
> > business activities....
> >
>
> I have an idea. A regent should be able to hide is involvement in a
> hostile realm action if he wants to - some kind of subterfuge or
> espionage. For example, say that the guild wants to contest the above
> temple in retaliation for a bungled trade deal. Maybe the guild doesn't
> want the church to know who's involved? Maybe they want to shift the
> blame? How about doubling the cost for the domain action, or having the
> guild do an espionage action first to hide the source of a domain
> action? That way you wouldn't know who was bidding RPs against you.
>
What about letting the player explain how exactly he wants this
contest action to take place. Then the DM can decide if the action is
noticed by others (or by some specific others or perhaps not at all).
The only thing a PC would know is that he is contested and quite
probably (something of) how it was done. It would increase the
uncertainty in your campaign, but it would be great for roleplaying.
Just take the example of the Spiderfell. If you do it right it'll
probably be a lot more fun.

Samuel_Barnes@icpmech.na
06-20-1997, 02:23 PM
trustno1@atcon.com wrote:

> >> Can you give an example ?
> >
> >Example: When the NPC contests one of the PC's holdings. Would the
> PC
> >automatically know who which NPC is doing it, or not? I think it
> >depends on the exact form the action takes.
>
> I'm inclined to say that the PC would know who.
> If it where temple holdings, then someone would be denouncing
> the PC's
> religion profusely, or promoting their own above all the other. If it
> were
> guilds, then maybe an advertising/promotion (?) campaign, so some
> other
> business activities....
>

I have an idea. A regent should be able to hide is involvement in a
hostile realm action if he wants to - some kind of subterfuge or
espionage. For example, say that the guild wants to contest the above
temple in retaliation for a bungled trade deal. Maybe the guild doesn't
want the church to know who's involved? Maybe they want to shift the
blame? How about doubling the cost for the domain action, or having the
guild do an espionage action first to hide the source of a domain action?
That way you wouldn't know who was bidding RPs against you.


I have seen a lot of interesting suggestions on this topic - one which has
sparked many conversations in nearly every Birthright campaign. I offer
here, some general reasons on the topic of whether a PC would know who or
which NPC was contesting a holding in his realm. I will also blanket these
reasons to include PC contesting, and NPC and PC actions taken in a PC's
realm.

For the record, I am not a GM and I don't envy the brave souls who take on
this often thankless task. So now, I offer this further advice on adding a
bit of spice to your campaign concerning the contesting of holdings.

My argument is that while the player would know that an action is being
attempted in his holdings, he would NOT know who was taking the action(s)
against him. He may have a general idea based on who the other local
regents are and his relationships with them. For example, a PC regent from
Ilien knows that El-hadid is the only other regent (guilder) in his
territory, and any actions against his holdings probably only come from
Roesone or Medoere.

So the question of "WHY the player would not know" begs to be answered. The
player probably would NOT know because the other regent is most likely not
an idiot. He will use stealth, subterfuge and various trickery to bring a
holding into his own power or to undermine the opposing players authority
there. Now, there are cases where a player may well know, but these are to
be left up to the GM.

Take this example; The regent of southern Talinie experiences a loss of
holding in the southern portion of his duchy. Well, one guess who that
might be . . . right, Boeruine. There are other factions in Talinie who
could be mastermining this uprising though. This is where a little quick
thinking and clever planning by the DM make the story far more interesting
and one which the players talk about for years afterward.

What is a player to do now? I offer three suggestions here that will put
the player well on his/her way to the Iron Throne - or at least a throne of
some ferrous alloy of the players chosing.

1) Free actions are the regent's 'ace in the hole.' While they have to be
used initially in the turn, they are very versatile and can have
wide-ranging influence if used properly by the intuitive regent.

In the Talinie example above, a few properly placed operatives early in the
game can yeild information dividends later on. Isn't that an Espionage
action? Yes and no. Since you are not attempting anything of note, it's a
free action, and you can call it what you will. The GM may require you to
pay a small fee for these 'information gatherers', but you're not looking
for anything expert. You want to know who was asking questions? What did
the aggitator look like? and such. Info like that costs money, but not much
more than a simple free action.

2) Second, fortify, fortify fortify. Not all of the kingdoms have the funds
of Endier, the diplomatic savy of Avanil, or the military clout of Ghoere,
but a well fortified will not fall easily. You may not have the money to
fortify all of your holdings or other players may force you to do otherwise,
but make this a priority if at all possible.

For example, I was regent of Roesone once, and my kingdom was over-run by
Ghoere while I was leading a force against the Chimaeron (good story if you
want to hear it). I also had a regent of the dominant trading guild in
Roesone and Aerenwe. The guilder had loads of money, and had fortified many
of her holdings. Ghoere's plans for a major take-over, were held up because
he couldn't remove the stubborn guilder without significant expenditure of
RP's and GB's!!

3) No matter what level you are, you will never have enough actions. First,
get a lieutenant. The extra action is precious. Second, bring other
regents under your control - preferably by friendly means. This may have
been a quirk to my campaign, but by gaining control of other holdings and
giving them to NPC friends, I was able to use their actions and free actions
to promote my kingdom - which now included Roesone and an entire guild.
This didn't happen overnight, and it took some clever role-playing and
shelling out serious GBs, but it was worth it. By the time the campaign
died a pre-mature death by disinterest I had 12 actions per turn not
counting free actions!!

[Note: Please respond if you think this is an abuse of the rules. The GM
did require that we get his approval of the actions, and there was some
role-playing involved. He allowed this because he didn't want to have to
run regents that were generally going to rubber stamp my actions any way.]

I offer the above suggestions to help everyone keep the game fun and
interesting, and to give an added bit of mystery to the players.
Personally, I enjoyed not knowing anything and having to discover it. Just
overhearing another player say something to the GM didn't really do much for
me except give me a chance to say, "what'd you do that for?" to the player.

trustno1@atcon.co
06-20-1997, 03:21 PM
>There was a comparison with todays businesses, where you know if someone is
>purchasing stocks in your company. Unlike our "modern" society, the rulers
>of Cerilia do NOT have to report their dealings to any sort of stock-market
>commission.

What sort of activities do you see guild or temples doing, that people
arn't going to notice ?

trustno1@atcon.co
06-20-1997, 03:35 PM
>From: Samuel_Barnes@icpmech.navy.mil (Samuel Barnes)

Nicely done, btw.

>My argument is that while the player would know that an action is being
>attempted in his holdings, he would NOT know who was taking the action(s)
>against him. He may have a general idea based on who the other local
>regents are and his relationships with them. For example, a PC regent from
>Ilien knows that El-hadid is the only other regent (guilder) in his
>territory, and any actions against his holdings probably only come from
>Roesone or Medoere.

I think this is a wonderful premise, especially as it looks at this topic
from a different percepective... hmm, now you got me thinking

>So the question of "WHY the player would not know" begs to be answered. The
>player probably would NOT know because the other regent is most likely not
>an idiot. He will use stealth, subterfuge and various trickery to bring a
>holding into his own power or to undermine the opposing players authority
>there. Now, there are cases where a player may well know, but these are to
>be left up to the GM.

... "not an idiot"... great line...
This philosophy is really quite interesting, what effect does it bringto
the game, I wonder ?

>1) Free actions are the regent's 'ace in the hole.' While they have to be
>used initially in the turn, they are very versatile and can have
>wide-ranging influence if used properly by the intuitive regent.

Ya can't do enough of them, IMO...
[I can hear my gms cursing me now....]

>3) No matter what level you are, you will never have enough actions. First,
>get a lieutenant. The extra action is precious. Second, bring other
>regents under your control - preferably by friendly means. This may have
>been a quirk to my campaign, but by gaining control of other holdings and
>giving them to NPC friends, I was able to use their actions and free actions
>to promote my kingdom - which now included Roesone and an entire guild.
>This didn't happen overnight, and it took some clever role-playing and
>shelling out serious GBs, but it was worth it. By the time the campaign
>died a pre-mature death by disinterest I had 12 actions per turn not
>counting free actions!!
>
>[Note: Please respond if you think this is an abuse of the rules. The GM
>did require that we get his approval of the actions, and there was some
>role-playing involved. He allowed this because he didn't want to have to
>run regents that were generally going to rubber stamp my actions any way.]

An interesting view of BR vassalage....
IMHO, I'd say that more than 4 actions is somewhat abusive, but similiar
effects can be achieved with some kick-bum diplomacy actions, too... :)

>I offer the above suggestions to help everyone keep the game fun and
>interesting, and to give an added bit of mystery to the players.
>Personally, I enjoyed not knowing anything and having to discover it. Just
>overhearing another player say something to the GM didn't really do much for
>me except give me a chance to say, "what'd you do that for?" to the player.

Too true, nothing is more interesting than that fog of war, that veil of
mystery, that smog of deceit....


-

Inge =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kj=F
06-20-1997, 05:00 PM
>> I'm inclined to say that the PC would know who.
>> If it where temple holdings, then someone would be denouncing
>> the PC's religion profusely, or promoting their own above all the other.
>>If >>it were guilds, then maybe an advertising/promotion (?) campaign, so
>>some
>> other business activities....
>>

Why would they know?? If someone was taking over a holding by pure brute
force, I agree, you would definitely KNOW (and be extremely aggreavated,
since you would be really hardpressed to do anything about it!!) But if
someone weaker or of similar relative power was contesting you, they
wouldn't be too blatant about it. An example is the holdings Avanil and
Boeruine both have in Tuornen in the Ruins of Empire book. These are
probably not gained by a too aggressive or open attempt at stealing away on
the holdings of Tuornens regent, since this would cause the affected regent
to turn to one or the another for support if they knew about it from the
start. The only way that Boeruine/Avanil would get away with is by the
discreet approach!

There was a comparison with todays businesses, where you know if someone is
purchasing stocks in your company. Unlike our "modern" society, the rulers
of Cerilia do NOT have to report their dealings to any sort of stock-market
commission.

>My argument is that while the player would know that an action is being
>attempted in his holdings, he would NOT know who was taking the action(s)
>against him. He may have a general idea based on who the other local
>regents are and his relationships with them. For example, a PC regent from
>Ilien knows that El-hadid is the only other regent (guilder) in his
>territory, and any actions against his holdings probably only come from
>Roesone or Medoere.
>
>So the question of "WHY the player would not know" begs to be answered. Th=
e
>player probably would NOT know because the other regent is most likely not
>an idiot. He will use stealth, subterfuge and various trickery to bring a
>holding into his own power or to undermine the opposing players authority
>there. Now, there are cases where a player may well know, but these are to
>be left up to the GM.
>


I have a lot more regard for the last suggestion, where you don't know, but
you can find out, either by using information networks, magic or other less
specific ways to glean information!

Either way, my campaign is run on the basis that a lot of NPC's are doing
something, and unless this is very obvious or the PC's are privy to this
information, they don't know what's happening. I believe this makes for
more roleplaying and adds a level of suspension that makes the PC's just
that little bit on the edge!

Sepsis
06-22-1997, 04:43 AM
Greetings,
I just wanted to throw my 2 GBs in on this topic. I agree that under most
circumstances PC Regents won't know what DAs other Regents are making.
Unless of course they are using Spies, some type of magic divination, or the
action is blatently obvious to the PC. Like the Church tat openly denounces
another. This goes not only for NPCs, but also for other PC Regents. I have
my Players turn in thier DAs written on paper. This way it keeps thier
actions confidential, and they don't have to worry about the others acting
according to what they do without first expending some game energy to find
out. :)

Sepsis, richt@metrolink.net

"War is a matter of vital importance to the State;
the province of life or death;
the road to survival or ruin.
It is mandatory that it be thoroughly studied."
-Sun Tzu,(The Art of War)-

Robert Harper
06-22-1997, 05:48 PM
At 12:43 AM 6/22/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Greetings,
>I just wanted to throw my 2 GBs in on this topic. I agree that under most
>circumstances PC Regents won't know what DAs other Regents are making.
>Unless of course they are using Spies, some type of magic divination, or the
>action is blatently obvious to the PC. Like the Church tat openly denounces
>another. This goes not only for NPCs, but also for other PC Regents. I have
>my Players turn in thier DAs written on paper. This way it keeps thier
>actions confidential, and they don't have to worry about the others acting
>according to what they do without first expending some game energy to find
>out. :)

Agreed people don't know actions when deciding their own, but most actions
become quite obvious once underway. Depending on proximity and travel by
general public, even without spies or agents (i.e. a trade route can bring
info as well as GB), the fact troops are moving, forts being built or
priests preaching new converts etc. are fairly obvious.

__________________________________________________ _________________
| |
| We ask ourselves if there is a God, how can this happen? |
| Better to ask, if there is a God, must it be sane? |
| |
| Lucien LaCroix |
|_________________________________________________ __________________|

tbeutler@sprynet.co
06-25-1997, 05:50 PM
gfgm